I suggest folks read it before they start imagining what happens to the people who enter this country illegally. Then you will see that the people on cable TV are not telling you the whole truth.

If we want others to follow our laws--i.e., not enter our country illegally--then we better be prepared to follow our laws ourselves. That is, we can't legally just deport massive numbers of people. If you don't like these laws, write your Representative and Senator and state your reasons for why they should try to change the laws.

I admit I just skimmed this, but the last poster was Cycle and I can respond by saying "yes," we should obey our own laws. Too many times the government simply ignores laws they find inconvenient because well they are the government. Hell, some laws have specific government exemptions written into them. In my world view that is what is referred to as bullshit. And keeping the same thought I am no expert on immigration, but I have a real issue with amnesty and other such programs that reward illegals for breaking the law.

Having said that, I could certainly support a change in law making it easier to get legal entry and ultimately citizenship. But like Val said amnesty is a slap in the face to those who did it the right way. As for the children at the boarder now while it is a heart rending issue I am sorry deport them. You cannot convince me the adults back in their home countries have not sent many of them here in an attempt to game the system by playing the sympathy card.

Regardless of people's stances on this topic, it is important to engage it in a civil and rational manner. Strong opinions are fine, but debating them in an adult manner is still required. If necessary, there is a sticky at the top of the forum that links to a post about logical fallacies.

Based on what I'm reading, I don't think any of the children being held right now will qualify for "deferred action" (they fall outside the time window). They may be able to show extreme hardship, but that requires a case-by-case review--I've yet to find a mechanism that allows for it to be done wholesale. So it looks to me that neither call is right. You can't "just deport them all." Nor can you "just give them all amnesty." You review each illegal immigrant's case and make a determination. That's what the law requires. Everything else just sounds like cable news talking heads trying to generate viewership and manipulate the same.

Edit:

And here's irony for you. The protestors who stopped the three buses from reaching the Murrieta Border Patrol station down in San Diego? Holding up signs demanding deportation?

They actually delayed the deportation process. The passengers of those buses were supposed to have their immigration hearings set at at that station. The first step to actually deporting them...

I am not sure I follow your statement of how receiving this driver's license makes this no longer an issue of their immigration status. They are still very much illegal immigrants, and receiving this ID does not provide them any "legal" status in the US. That is why such issues are so confounding - it is granting legal privileges to illegal immigrants, which is ironic to say the least.

The point you made that I was responding to was that there was an increase in hit and runs because illegal immigrants who were involved in car accidents couldn't stop to show ID or insurance and thus drove off.

If you give the illegal immigrants a way to get ID and insurance that doesn't carry with it the threat of deportation in and of itself then this reason for them driving off disappears. They have ID and insurance, therefore they can show it. Thus, if they continued to drive off after an accident it's not longer a matter of their immigration status... after all they can have ID and insurance even with their status... it's a matter of, in essence, morality and criminality.

I think (or at least, would hope) that all Americans would agree that in an ideal world, all immigration would take place through legal channels. The question Americans need to ask is whether or not we are "early enough" in the game to be able to tackle the issue of illegal immigration head on through targeted deportation, or pass laws to adapt to an existence where illegal immigration is a fact of American life.

From what I understand, estimates in 2010 put the number of illegal immigrants at over 10,000,000 in the US... and I imagine it's increased by then, even with the Financial Crisis causing many to return.

The cost, time and effort to find, let alone deport, even a significant number of those is going to be astronomical and frankly isn't realistic to even consider. The balance to be struck is between finding the best way to accommodate those already there while also preventing more from arriving; be it by tightening security or making legal immigration an easier and better option.

There are legal avenues for applying for refugee status and asylum. The US has refugee quotas and a designated application process. Illegal immigrants bypass this entirely, which is essentially the crux of the issue. There are programs for unaccompanied refugee minors who essentially land unattended on US soil, but I think we can all agree that this privilege is being abused to no end at this point (given that many parents are intentionally sending their kids on these treks across Mexico for a "better life" in the US). What message are we sending by turning this token of good will into a regimented immigration avenue?

That's sort of my point though... there are very different systems in place for dealing with refugees and asylum seekers compared to illegal immigrants. Using the example of refugees (either as a reason of why illegal immigrants should be treated less harshly or to use as an example of someone who deserves assistance compared to say economic migrants)in a debate such as this is somewhat awkward because they're two separate issues, albeit two that are often conflated.

1. Seal the borders as well as practical. More fences, more border patrol agents, expansion and streamlining of immigration hearings and court systems.

2. Deal with the ten million illegal immigrants we have already inside the United States. Sift through the criminals and other reprobates and deport them somewhere else. Offer the rest pathways to amnesty/citizenship. Even though a lot of them cheated or gamed the system under this general idea, it's a compromise that likely and practically has to be made.

3. Make legal immigration easier and increase the quotes so Indian engineers and Filipino nurses don't have to wait twenty years in line to become a citizen while others get smuggled across by cartels and get easier pathways to citizenship by breaking the rules like they do now.

The point you made that I was responding to was that there was an increase in hit and runs because illegal immigrants who were involved in car accidents couldn't stop to show ID or insurance and thus drove off.

If you give the illegal immigrants a way to get ID and insurance that doesn't carry with it the threat of deportation in and of itself then this reason for them driving off disappears. They have ID and insurance, therefore they can show it. Thus, if they continued to drive off after an accident it's not longer a matter of their immigration status... after all they can have ID and insurance even with their status... it's a matter of, in essence, morality and criminality.

I understand your points regarding the ID and insurance. I do agree that it is a practical, direct solution for the hit-and-run problem. However, my concern is that over the long-term, such legislation is progressively normalizing illegal immigrants as another subset of the American population, giving them many of the rights and privileges granted to legal residents and citizens. While this certainly can be seen as a positive, given that there are 10 million+ illegal immigrants in the US, it will also likely encourage foreigners to increasingly see this as a viable option. In addition, as Zakharra had said, as illegal immigrants are increasingly given privileges similar to legal residents, their lobbying power towards gaining citizenship increasingly rises.

For example, as I had said earlier, the institution of an ITIN instead of a social security number was a means of somehow documenting the work and gaining tax revenue from the labor that illegal immigrants were doing. Because this increasingly elevated their privileges, this is now being used by illegal immigrant lobby groups who claim that because they have been paying taxes and participating in the workforce "legally," they deserve to be given legal status.

Despite that though, I do want to acknowledge that I do see the merit in what you are saying, and both options have pros and cons.

That's sort of my point though... there are very different systems in place for dealing with refugees and asylum seekers compared to illegal immigrants. Using the example of refugees (either as a reason of why illegal immigrants should be treated less harshly or to use as an example of someone who deserves assistance compared to say economic migrants)in a debate such as this is somewhat awkward because they're two separate issues, albeit two that are often conflated.

The reason I made the comparison between asylum seekers and illegal immigrants is because nearly two-thirds of the illegal immigrant children who have crossed the border this year have been approved for asylum.

The problem with having children enter the conversation is that, genetically we are programmed to be protective of children. It is a part of human nature. We will feel empathy and we have this desire to protect them. So if you add kids to a hot topic, it muddles the water a fair bit. If you have children that are on there own, well hell, that just makes the issue worse.

If you take the whole "Oh won't someone please think of the children" shit out of the issues then what have we got? Because that's what interests me. When emotion is cut away from the issue, what have we got? Because I hate to sound heartless, but sometimes that is what is needed if only so that way a topic can be seen from other angles.

I'm a foreign worker that lives in the DC area legally, and even though I have several think tanks based in Washington who have been asking to hire me, I do not intend to remain in the United States for the long-term. The hate and vitriol directed towards Hispanics and Muslims is extremely distressing. I shudder at the thought of legal, skilled immigrants like I falling under the crosshairs of those who scream, "E TUK ER JERBZ." It's not a matter of if, but when.

And yes, before I came here, I did have plans to stay on and hopefully attain citizenship. Not anymore.

Also, just because I ticked the "yes" box for "Did you undergo training for firearms and explosives?" in the visa questionnaire does not give carte blanche to TSA agents opening up my bags in front of me and ruining 1/3 of my stuff. It does nothing to encourage me to stick around. I had training for firearms and explosives because I served my fucking country.

The hate and vitriol directed towards Hispanics and Muslims is extremely distressing. I shudder at the thought of legal, skilled immigrants like I falling under the crosshairs of those who scream, "E TUK ER JERBZ." It's not a matter of if, but when.

As a naturalized US citizen, I also agree that this is a matter of 'if' and not 'when.' In fact, the main reason I am so passionate about this issue is because I know that I will be the recipient of increased negative stereotyping in upcoming years as a minority (as illegal immigration lends itself to more gang-related crime in the US).

Heck, I'm already seeing it here. Our once safe town now has a gunshot every night, and more often than not, this is due to gang violence (MS-13). Being of South Asian heritage, it is easy for people at night to mistake me for being Hispanic. Usually I dress professionally so people don't assume I am a gang member or anything, but when I come back from the gym at nights in shorts and a sleeveless shirt, I have noticed people avoiding eye contact and actually crossing the street!

I honestly can't blame them either, because they are just protecting themselves from the reality of crime that our town faces. But it's sad that it has come to this point, where illegal immigration makes us more racially divided.

I think that's the main reason why so many legal immigrants to the US are upset by this. There are many talented, law-abiding, and honest people in every Latin American country. We should enforce our border laws more strictly, and potentially modify our immigration quotas to encourage access for the law-abiding citizens of these countries.

As a naturalized US citizen, I also agree that this is a matter of 'if' and not 'when.' In fact, the main reason I am so passionate about this issue is because I know that I will be the recipient of increased negative stereotyping in upcoming years as a minority (as illegal immigration lends itself to more gang-related crime in the US).

Heck, I'm already seeing it here. Our once safe town now has a gunshot every night, and more often than not, this is due to gang violence (MS-13). Being of South Asian heritage, it is easy for people at night to mistake me for being Hispanic. Usually I dress professionally so people don't assume I am a gang member or anything, but when I come back from the gym at nights in shorts and a sleeveless shirt, I have noticed people avoiding eye contact and actually crossing the street!

I honestly can't blame them either, because they are just protecting themselves from the reality of crime that our town faces. But it's sad that it has come to this point, where illegal immigration makes us more racially divided.

I think that's the main reason why so many legal immigrants to the US are upset by this. There are many talented, law-abiding, and honest people in every Latin American country. We should enforce our border laws more strictly, and potentially modify our immigration quotas to encourage access for the law-abiding citizens of these countries.

I was done chiming in on this but yeah Val the lack of respect is vexing. Often for obvious reasons but still. The fellow from work I hang out with as much as anyone is of the same heritage as you. When we go out to lunch and such I see things like you describe. The irony? He was born in freaking Oklahoma! While his parents are from the old country and he is bilingual and such, he speaks better English than I do and is probably more American than I am. But people make racist assumptions about him all the time.